The Iran Thread

If it's proven Iran's helping the insurgency kill American troops, do we invade Iran?

  • yes

  • no

  • not sure


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Did I miss the last time we did nothing and someone got nuked? :confused:

It takes that type of thinking for it to occur. There is a first time for everything.

‘All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing’
 
-Being allied with the Russians certainly gives them a confidence boost. -Persistent rhetoric should always be taken seriously.
-We've been hearing forever that they've been working on a nuclear program. Shortly after we invaded Iraq, I read that Iran's nuke testing hours were far and away more numerous than Iraq's.

Still, what can we do about it? Its a "damned if you do, damned if you dont" situation. A strike at the nuclear facilities would result in the closing of the Straights of Hormuz, amount other retaliatory actions. Without oil, the teetering economy would fall apart. If we dont remove the threat, we can kiss Israel goodbye.

So whats the best course of action?

Well, if we are going to go by the good 'ol U.N. guidelines I suppose we need to try to get more nations to back our objectives. I think Obama delaying the missle shield in Europe might be a wise idea to get Russia on our side with Iran.

Obviously, the president of Iran seems crazy enough to not care if they lost Russia as an ally but at least if we realized Sanctions wouldn't work then we could use some type of military intervention with little resistance. I'm not sure what they would do about the Straights of Hormuz but it might end up being a reconstruction of Iranian Government. If you know what I'm getting at.

I don't know the whole scenario because I'm not Obama. So, I'm just speculating and saying what I feel should be done based on the facts I have.
 
The President of Iran is not deciding anything in Iran. The Supreme Leader makes such decisions. The President is just implementing what the Supreme leader decides. The Supreme Leader is Khamanei and he has his position for life.

The situtation is very scary when you think the person in power is a cleric who holds his position until he dies and he has absolute power.
 
The President of Iran is not deciding anything in Iran. The Supreme Leader makes such decisions. The President is just implementing what the Supreme leader decides. The Supreme Leader is Khamanei and he has his position for life.

The situtation is very scary when you think the person in power is a cleric who holds his position until he dies and he has absolute power.

I see what your saying I know the President doesn't make the decisions but what I am saying is the rhetoric that he spews doesn't make me believe that he wouldn't go rogue and launch a nuke anyways just because he wants Israel gone.

About the the cleric holding his position until he dies. This is why term limits and democracy are good things.
 
It takes that type of thinking for it to occur. There is a first time for everything.

‘All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing’


I realize that but you were speaking in past tense as if these things had happened before.
 
I see what your saying I know the President doesn't make the decisions but what I am saying is the rhetoric that he spews doesn't make me believe that he wouldn't go rogue and launch a nuke anyways just because he wants Israel gone.

About the the cleric holding his position until he dies. This is why term limits and democracy are good things.

I don't disagree with you but I was just saying that he cannot launch anything but the cleric definitely can and I am more afraid of that.

And yes, absolute dictatorship is not a good thing when you have such people in power.

It just makes me kind of laugh (but not with any humour) when I think they overthrew a King to get a religious leader with more powers and a life time rule.
 
The only countries i'm scared of using Nuclear weapons are the western ones.
 
I don't think anything can be done about Iran. Apart from actually going to war with them, which I hope doesn't happen.

I would imagine that as soon as hostility is shown towards Iran, they'll just fire off a few nukes.
 
I don't think anything can be done about Iran. Apart from actually going to war with them, which I hope doesn't happen.

I would imagine that as soon as hostility is shown towards Iran, they'll just fire off a few nukes.

They do not have a few nukes but war with iran would be a quagmire that would likely be too costly.
 
Yea but if they have nukes (when they get em) I don't think they would hesitate in firing them off. They just come across as that sort of country.
 
Well yea that's what I mean. Their President is a scum bag. If anything, he should just be secretly assassinated by the SAS or something.

I like the SAS idea.

The only countries i'm scared of using Nuclear weapons are the western ones.

We are more then likely the last ones to use nuclear weapons. After our country saw what type of devestation it caused on Hiroshima I doubt we'll use them other then in retaliation for another nuclear attack. Which, in my opinion, is a given.
 
Well you know who put Khomeini in power? ........ It was the US, GB and France. They then realised their error.

I have had dreams where the whole current government was overturned and Khamenei (Khomeini's successor) and his whole clique put through great hardships. But the likelyhood of it happening is unfortunately very small. The current president is just a pawn and totally unimportant. Killing him would do very littlle.
 
Israel is seriously considering taking unilateral military action to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, according to a report by top US political figures and experts released Wednesday.


The report also says Israel's time frame for action is growing shorter, not only because of Iranian advances, but because Teheran might soon acquire upgraded air defenses and disperse its nuclear program to additional locations.

The report, "Preventing a Cascade of Instability," was put out by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP). It also argues that international sanctions against Iran need to be intensified urgently for the engagement the Obama administration is planning with Teheran to be effective.

An early draft of the report was endorsed by Dennis Ross before he withdrew upon joining the Obama administration, in which he is serving as a special adviser dealing with various countries in the region, including Iran. Senator Evan Bayh of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and Congressman Gary Ackerman, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on the Middle East, were among the signatories.


The bipartisan group also recommended increasing security guarantees and the supply of missile defenses and other protective measures to allies in the Middle East, both to reassure them of America's commitment to them and to dampen the perceived effectiveness, and hence appeal, of nuclear weapons for Iran.
But the report, several of whose authors met with high-level Israeli officials to assess their perspective, notes that Israel is not interested in becoming part of an American nuclear umbrella, even as Gulf countries want more assurances on that front.


"A declared US guarantee would clarify a situation of ambiguity that may already work to Israel's advantage," the report notes. Also, "many Israelis fear that a declared US guarantee could come at the price of circumscribing Israel's freedom of action in confronting existential dangers."

"It's quite serious in acting on its own about a nuclear-armed Iran," former US ambassador to the United Nations Nancy Soderberg, one of the task force members who traveled to the region to research the report, said at a WINEP event held Wednesday on the report's release.
She noted that the timetable for an Israeli attack might be "significantly" moved up if Jerusalem believed Russia was going to make good on its pledge to supply Iran with the S-300 surface-to-air missile system, which would greatly complicate any Israeli attack.

If the delivery does occur, the report recommends more arms sales to Israel, such as more modern aircraft, so it can maintain its military edge.

Later, she said that the aim of the report was to come up with strategies where neither the United States nor Israel was at the point of launching military action.

"You've kind of lost the ballgame at that point," she said.

To that end, the 10-page document urges more international sanctions and expanding financial pressure taken by the US Treasury, by creating similar programs at the US Commerce and State Departments.

The study stresses the importance of having a united global front and pushes for intensified diplomacy with Russia to both make sanctions more effective and to persuade the Russians not to deliver the S-300 system.

"Iran does not want to be isolated on the international stage: It is not North Korea. The broader the international consensus, the better. The repeated shows of unanimity by the UN Security Council seem to have impressed Iran more than the limited economic or security impact of the sanctions imposed thus far," the report states, in making the case for more sanctions.

At the same time, it contends that aggressive engagement is needed because "another important goal is to show the Middle East and the world that the United States will go the extra mile to resolve the Iranian nuclear issue. Some circles in countries friendly to the United States now wonder - without reason - if Washington is as much an obstacle to resolving the nuclear impasse as is Teheran."

Even if engagement, sanctions and other measures prove ineffective, the report warns against sanctioning a "fallback" policy where Iran is allowed to have some, even if limited, capacity to enrich uranium in its territory.

"Iran's having a latent capability to quickly make nuclear weapons could lead to much the same risk of cascading instability as an Iran with an actual weapon," it reads, pointing to the risk for nuclear proliferation, Iranian regional hegemony and more.

The report makes no mention of the presidential elections in Iran this June, which could see the more moderate Muhammad Khatami replace fiery current President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Some analysts have suggested that the Obama administration wait to either engage or press for further sanctions until after the campaign, so as not to increase the likelihood of Admadinejad winning.

But the task force calls for immediate action, arguing that the president is less important than Iran's supreme leader, Ayatolla Ali Khamenei, in making decisions and that the top priority should be creating leverage heading into negotiations.

An Iranian professor in the audience at Wednesday's WINEP conference, however, said that increasing pressure would increase extremism and Iranian hard-line leaders' sticking to the nuclear program.

WINEP executive director Robert Satloff, who presided over the conference, responded that the report's recommendations also included many incentives for Iran should it cooperate with the United States.

He also said Iran was already beginning to reap some of the rewards of influence just by having been successful in advancing its nuclear program, and that this report was intended to stanch that progress.

"Even without testing a nuclear weapon or declaring the ability to do so, Iran's progress toward nuclear weapons capability is already having a substantial impact on the Middle East," it says. "Time is short if diplomatic engagement is to have a chance of success."

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1236103158937&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull
 
Interesting that this article came from an Israeli news source. That gives its more credibility, imo. Its coming from the horse's mouth.

Either way, it sounds like something will have to be done and will be done in fairly short time. More diplomacy with Russia and Iran or military action. I gotta say that the arms sales discussion reminded me of the Cold War. Russia sends air defense tech to Iran so the US sends more military hardware to Israel.

Diplomacy with the Russians would be the best bet, if only Putin werent so set on making Moscow a world power again. Sure, Russia would be an independent world power...if it always caves to US diplomacy. Thats what I'm thinking his reasoning will be.
 
Interesting that this article came from an Israeli news source. That gives its more credibility, imo. Its coming from the horse's mouth.

Either way, it sounds like something will have to be done and will be done in fairly short time. More diplomacy with Russia and Iran or military action. I gotta say that the arms sales discussion reminded me of the Cold War. Russia sends air defense tech to Iran so the US sends more military hardware to Israel.

Diplomacy with the Russians would be the best bet, if only Putin werent so set on making Moscow a world power again. Sure, Russia would be an independent world power...if it always caves to US diplomacy. Thats what I'm thinking his reasoning will be.

I'm sure they'll eventually get there but currently they are acting like a bunch of two year olds saying its 'not fair, wah, wah, we aren't a superpower anymore so we are going to screw with you, wah, wah'.

At least that is how they are appearing to me.
 
I'm sure they'll eventually get there but currently they are acting like a bunch of two year olds saying its 'not fair, wah, wah, we aren't a superpower anymore so we are going to screw with you, wah, wah'.

At least that is how they are appearing to me.

That may be true, but they are a whiny two year old with a lot of power and influence that are defending an unstable Middle Eastern government. Not a good combo.
 
That may be true, but they are a whiny two year old with a lot of power and influence that are defending an unstable Middle Eastern government. Not a good combo.

Couldn't agree more.
 
Iran has always been the biggest threat from the Middle East. The only thing that stood out about Iraq was it had a face in the form of Saddam Hussein. Hell, Saddam hated the Al-Quieda(sp) and the Taliban, him being there kept Iran out of reach for those cells.

In my opinion, Iran has yet to be punished for the U.S. Embassy hostage crisis. They are a threat, and ask yourself, would the world not be better off without Iran? What do they contribute to the world?
 
Iran has always been the biggest threat from the Middle East. The only thing that stood out about Iraq was it had a face in the form of Saddam Hussein. Hell, Saddam hated the Al-Quieda(sp) and the Taliban, him being there kept Iran out of reach for those cells.

In my opinion, Iran has yet to be punished for the U.S. Embassy hostage crisis. They are a threat, and ask yourself, would the world not be better off without Iran? What do they contribute to the world?

Oil, gas and not blowing us up thank you very much. :o

Seriously, Iran is a bigger threat than Iraq ever was. I'm reading the 9-11 Commission Report and it says that Saddam and al Qaida at best had polite meetings where they agreed that they both hated America. Al Qaida actually got training and materials from Iran. War isnt the option but neither is inaction and diplomacy is a shaky option. Thats the conundrum.
 
Oil, gas and not blowing us up thank you very much. :o

Seriously, Iran is a bigger threat than Iraq ever was. I'm reading the 9-11 Commission Report and it says that Saddam and al Qaida at best had polite meetings where they agreed that they both hated America. Al Qaida actually got training and materials from Iran. War isnt the option but neither is inaction and diplomacy is a shaky option. Thats the conundrum.

I know Iran was and is a bigger threat than Iraq could have been on Saddam's best day. It's a country we should have put down decades ago, and now thats not an option, as you said. Iran is nothing but a danger to the United States.

The saddest part is, Iran truly views the American people as weak and cowardly, and the sad part is, this country has become, for one reason or another, weak and cowardly.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"